Editorial Policies and Practices Among Leading Journals in Four Scientific Fields

The editorial policies and practices of leading journals in four scientific fields are compared to determine differences related to stages of paradigm development. Hypotheses are developed and tested on the use of particularism, the ease of reaching editorial decisions, the length of articles, extent of copy-editing, and time lags in the publication process. Data were obtained via a mail survey of the editors of the top ten journals in physics, chemistry, sociology, and political science, as nominated by university scientists. Results are generally supportive of the hypotheses. Data on available space, financial support, and rejection rates are also discussed as reinforcing tendencies toward particularism and increasing its costs.